Missing Rules

[Oofta]

i dunno 300+ posts seems like a mountain.

Are we really just arguing about action adjudication? or are we arguing about the jumping rules? Every time i think we’ve settled on the former a person on the other side says no, you can’t jump beyond the limit prescribed in the book without some approach other than sheer effort. Basically that the rules say there’s a hard limit on pure jumping: guaranteed success followed immediately by guaranteed failure.

Which is it for you?

I think it's a mountain created around a molehill and that most people just make a ruling on and move on.

I didn't realize stating how you declare what your character is doing was an issue to anyone. As a DM I have a preference that people interact with the world from the perspective of the PC but if they sometimes skip to asking for a skill check I just go with it to keep the game going. I might comment back to clarify what they are doing.

End of the day? Make a decision for your game. Jumping an unusually long distance just means there's a chance of failure? Jumping an unusually long distance requires "something" extra?

The former is the way I run it because I'm more into narrative gameplay and dramatic jumps with chances of falling to the alley below are quite common trope. I don't care if that makes it a house rule in some people's opinions. I don't think it is but to each their own. If a DM ruled the latter I'd disagree and move on.

It's a molehill.

 

[robus]

[MENTION=6801845]Oofta[/MENTION] & [MENTION=71699]clearstream[/MENTION] good points. Now I'm stepping out of this thread for real! (i.e. no more lurking and getting sucked back in!)

 

[Reynard]

That would mean that there is no risk and the PC is basically jumping on a flat road or something. If there is any risk of falling and taking damage, there is pressure. A gorge that is 10 feet wide and 10 feet deep is sufficient to hurt someone who falls, so it would not be a routine jump with no pressure.

10 feet is a long way. It is a DC 15 check in my system. If you have a +5 you are good (taking 10, which I don't remember off hand is still an official rule in 5e but is one I like so I use it). If you aren't a very good jumper you might want to tie a rope around yourself and have the barbarian anchor you.

That's how I would run it in that circumstance.

 

[Oofta]

[MENTION=6801845]Oofta[/MENTION] & [MENTION=71699]clearstream[/MENTION] good points. Now I'm stepping out of this thread for real! (i.e. no more lurking and getting sucked back in!)

Good luck with that. I fail my wisdom save all the time.

 

[iserith]

Are we really just arguing about action adjudication? or are we arguing about the jumping rules? Every time i think we’ve settled on the former a person on the other side says no, you can’t jump beyond the limit prescribed in the book without some approach other than sheer effort.

The part I bolded is up to the individual judgment of the DM as part of the adjudication process. You're okay with "sheer effort." For others, that approach is insufficient. The rules don't say either way.

 

[pemerton]

I've said several times now that jumping an unusually long distance is possible. But it requires an approach that the DM will accept. There can be no success or even uncertainty until that time. That is the way actions are adjudicated in D&D 5e. You may say that "I try harder" is sufficient. I do not judge that it is. Neither of us are wrong. What judgment a DM makes in this realm is unassailable preference.

But "I jump" is an approach. The reason you don't accept it is because of your interpretation of p 64 as setting the maximum distance that can be cleared by a declaration "I jump".

YAll we are saying is a player in our game would have to actually describe what the PC is doing. It's really simple and easy.

How many times to I have to say that noone is disagreeing with this. The player describes what his/her PC is doing: "I jump!" or, for more colour, "I jump as far as I can, giving it all I've got!"

Running long jumpers often have multiple feet of difference between their various jumps.

Yes. That's why it's often uncertain that a PC will jump as far as s/he can, which therefore suggests that rules that set a certain distance (ie the rules on p 64 of the Basic PDF) aren't rules that set the furthest a PC can jump!

AIt's really not hard at all to come up with some believable set of circumstances to jump a few extra feet. Why force the DM to play your character by asking to make an athletics check to go further?

That second sentence is unwarranted. A player delcaring "I jump as far as I can!" is (i) not asking to make an atheltics check, and (ii) is not forcing the GM to play his/her character. S/he is forcing the GM to decide whether or not it is uncertain that the furthest the PC can jump is more or less than the width of the chasm, but that's what the GM gets paid to do!

As for the first sentence, would you care to give an example or two?

 

[iserith]

But "I jump" is an approach. The reason you don't accept it is because of your interpretation of p 64 as setting the maximum distance that can be cleared by a declaration "I jump".

And that is a fair reading in my view. We need more information about how the character is jumping an unusually long distance before we can decide whether they can actually do that. Some DMs have different thresholds for what that will be.

 

[Charlaquin]

And that is a fair reading in my view. We need more information about how the character is jumping an unusually long distance before we can decide whether they can actually do that. Some DMs have different thresholds for what that will be.

And that’s really all there is to it. We can talk circles around it for days, but ultimately this is what it comes down to.

 

[iserith]

And that’s really all there is to it. We can talk circles around it for days, but ultimately this is what it comes down to.

Yeah, at a certain point, the rules leave off and the role of the DM necessarily kicks in to make a ruling and that's going to come down to preference. So while you, and Max, and I can explain why we would make the call we would make in play and pemerton and robus and others can explain why they'd make a different call, these are all matters of personal preference and not up for debate, at least in terms of being correct or incorrect.

 

[5ekyu]

I think the question comes down to how perversely one wants to understand the meaning of "unusual" (in Athletics). Where "unusual" is used, by implication it contrasts with some "usual" state of affairs. If that usual, for jumping, is not specified in the rules on jumping, where is it specified?

[MENTION=23751]Maxperson[/MENTION] argues that this is left ambiguous to give scope for DM judgement. Say that's true? It's every DM for themselves because if Jumping doesn't tell you what usual jumping is, it's make it up as you go time.

Conversely, one can suppose the meaning of a "usual" jump is that distance listed under Jumping. The rules then play out well because if I have 10 Strength I can long jump 1-10' and an unusual long jump is any long jump I attempt over that. Of course, the rules are then nearly silent on the DC for that attempt: and here we find ourselves

That is - i think obviously, where i stand or sit.

Your usual length jump and the jumps you can make on the run with no chance of failure and no action spent as just a part of your move up to your feet in strength etc (per chap 10) are "usual length jumps."

leaping further than that - attempting to do so - requiring an athletics skill check with chances for success, failure and setbacks is what is referred to as "unusually long jump" in the Ability check chapter per the rules there.

The lack of pre-defined DCs for this one skill check example does not mean you need pogo sticlery to make the attempt - you just have to define your goal and approach and your approach does not have to be different from the other jumps - tho it can be.

Example: For strength 10 character. No extenuating circumstances.
"I rush forward and jump the 4' pool wanting to land just on the other side and keep going." No roll required by the distance and no special language for "how i jump."
"I rush forward and jump the 8' pool wanting to land just on the other side and keep going." No roll required by the distance and no special language different for "how i jump."
"I rush forward and jump the 12' pool wanting to land just on the other side and keep going." No special language for "how i jump" but an Athletics check would be required because it is beyond their base, safe 10' option and so all the risks inherent with failure can apply including setbacks.
"I rush forward and jump the 5' pool wanting to go as far as I can." No special language for "how i jump" but an Athletics check would be required because it is going for as far as possible, not as far as is reliable and safe and so all the risks inherent with failure can apply including setbacks. Why would they try this? Use your imagination.